It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


CERN Debunks Climate Change Models? The CLOUD Conundrum

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:57 AM
CLOUD shows pre-industrial skies cloudier than we thought. Apparently, its been assumed that Sulfuric Acid was necessary for clouds to form, and that more Sulfur Dioxide in the atmosphere means more clouds during the industrial era. Therefore, man made clouds of cooling have kept man made gas of heating in check has been the assumption until now: meaning, all of the climate change related computer models assumed there was less clouds in the past, and these computer models have been the basis for basically all of the reports related to Global WARM-mongering.

CERN's CLOUD (Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets) Experiment:

Could there be a link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation? An experiment at CERN is using the cleanest box in the world to find out.
The Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment uses a special cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron (PS) at CERN, this is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science. The results should contribute much to our fundamental understanding of aerosols and clouds, and their affect on climate.

Here goes a well put together 2010 piece, by ATS member/writer Sinter Klaas, that show great details from when "CLOUD" was formed and initial data's relating to cosmic rays and cloud formation:
The CLOUD Project (MUST SEE)

Now fast forward to 2016, after years of the scientists there beating this CLOUD chamber to death:
"The results not only point to a cloudier past, but they also indicate a potentially cooler future: If Earth’s climate is less sensitive to rising carbon dioxide (CO2) levels, as the study suggests, future temperatures may not rise as quickly as predicted." -Judith Curry

See also: Climate Viewer
CERN’s CLOUD Experiment recently published three new papers:
- Ion induced nucleation of pure biogenic particles
- The role of low-volatility organic compounds in initial particle growth in the atmosphere
- New particle formation in the free troposphere: A question of chemistry and timing.

From Science Magazine:

Earth’s climate may not warm as quickly as expected, suggest new cloud studies
All the researchers stress sulfuric acid is still a major contributor to cloud formation on Earth today. “Today the purely plant-based pathway is much less important than it was preindustrially,” Kirkby explains. Crucially, however,the result means climate modelers can’t assume that the ancient past was much less cloudy simply because there was less sulfur dioxide. If ancient cloud cover was closer to today’s levels, the increase in the cloud-cooling effect due to human pollution could also be smaller—which means that Earth was not warming up so much in response to increased greenhouse gases alone. In other words, Earth is less sensitive to greenhouse gases than previously thought, and it may warm up less in response to future carbon emissions, says Urs Baltensperger of the Paul Scherrer Institute, who was an author on all three papers. He says that the current best estimates of future temperature rises are still feasible, but “the highest values become improbable.” The researchers are currently working toward more precise estimates of how the newly discovered process affects predictions of the Earth’s future climate.

And in Nature News:

Cloud-seeding surprise could improve climate predictions
Molecules released by trees can seed clouds, two experiments have revealed. The findings, published on 25 May in Nature1, 2 and Science3, run contrary to an assumption that the pollutant sulphuric acid is required for a certain type of cloud formation — and suggest that climate predictions may have underestimated the role that clouds had in shaping the pre-industrial climate.
In addition to releasing carbon dioxide, burning fossil fuels indirectly produces sulphuric acid, which is known to seed clouds. So, climate scientists have assumed that since pre-industrial times, there has been a large increase in cloud cover, which is thought to have an overall cooling effect by reflecting sunlight back into space. And they have assumed that this overall cooling effect has partially masked the climate’s underlying sensitivity to rising carbon dioxide levels.
Until recently, atmospheric scientists thought that only sulphuric acid vapour, which can be produced by volcanic emissions or by burning fossil fuels, could trigger this process. As a result, it was thought that pre-industrial skies were somewhat less cloudy than present ones because they contained less of this pollutant, says Kirkby.

In any case, I gotta say: Here in Central FLorida, last summer was the wettest on record. This winter I read that last year was the hottest on record (like everywhere). I know for a fact "Fall" here was... as Fall never even happened (I'm being dead serious here)! There wasn't a single cold front for some 8 or more months leading straight into New Years (not one!). It was 99 degrees on Dec. 29th! Hot and dry scorcher of a Fall... Hot and dry year so far (okay, it was cold in Jan.). I mean HOT. I grow rare exotic plants for a living, and am more in tune with the climate than just about anybody. I have to be, and yet despite this, and being as hardcore a hard worker could be, despite constantly attempting to 'bullet proof' my op for the wild climate here... because of the climate almost specifically, I've still lost over $100,000 in the past year exactly, as a result of this extreme climate I've been perceiving / experiencing. Hope it cools down the next couple years, or I might have to start ALARMING too...
However... if you've ever spent an entire year down here, to suggest there were far less clouds in the past, then this place would have been a desert when Christopher Columbus showed up!
edit on 5-6-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 03:01 AM
Well, that can't be right....

otherwise you couldn't tax it.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 03:14 AM
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Did you listen to what he said at the end? Says we are still do for considerable warming and this will just sharpen those numbers.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 03:56 AM
The people who cling onto the Climate Change contextual lie will have a brain aneurysm before accepting this information.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 05:01 AM
i think you might be missing the point. before trees and plants made the particles without any pollution at all. resulting in clean clouds.

The industrial age came along and hey presto we made those particles with sulphuric acid, resulting in acidic rain of all things. The forestry and chopping back the rain forest will have a massive effect on the planet not being able to produce enough particles to seed enough clouds to cool the entire planet.

In my honest opinion global warming is down to deforesting more than what we pump out in waste.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 05:17 AM
a reply to: StickyBuddha

Do you have some data suggesting that acid rain intensifies AGW?

You do have a point there though, although manmade etc is part of the equation. Its not the ONLY part of the equation, which the computer models always left out.

As a horticulturalist / chemist, not too long ago I had sent to me some chain email sort of propaganda, that went on screaming about how manmade fertilizers are the worst in every way, even claiming it hurts plants! The reality is, manmade fertilizers DO cause aquatic algae blooms, that kill other aquatic life. etc.

But there's no getting around the facts related to more CO2 + more phyto-available nutrients floating around means more lush plant life on planet earth. To deny it would be like denying that humans can even affect massive change anything like on the scale of AGW.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:01 PM
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

But there's no getting around the facts related to more CO2 + more phyto-available nutrients floating around means more lush plant life on planet earth.

Well when we cut down all the trees there isn't the foliage to absorb that CO2. Also plants need more than just CO2.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 02:07 PM
Am I missing something here? As I recall from my childhood many moons ago it went something like this.
Solar rays ie. the suns heat evaporated water out of the oceans and seas and that evaporation caused clouds. Not any particles from any source. Yes, I agree after the clouds were formed any such "stuff" that's in the atmosphere at the time would be mixed up with the clouds hence acid rain but clouds per se need no kernel of anything to form as from a start clouds are just eveporated water.

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 03:56 PM

originally posted by: Kalixi

The people who cling onto the Climate Change contextual lie will have a brain aneurysm before accepting this information.

That's not true at all! The climate always changes, just the fearmongering about how it is changing and what is causing it changes more than the actual climate!

top topics


log in